Illinois Deserves the Truth

Nursing Home Justice

With all of the recent talk around nursing homes in recent months (us included here, here)- much of it to do with the acquisition of Manor Care by the Carlyle Group and the quality of care loss that usually follows this type of business deal - it's a great thing to see that the Illinois House is looking at a bill (HB 5213) to help protect nursing home victims and hold nursing homes accountable for their wrongful actions. 

In a nut shell, HB 5213 would require Illinois nursing homes to carry a minimum amount of liability insurance.  Bruce Kohen, President of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, states that 20 percent of nursing homes go without any liability insurance at all. (Yikes, if I had to entrust the care of myself or a loved one to a nursing home, I would like to know if they carried liability insurance or not. I honestly assumed that they had to.)  To add on to this shocking tidbit, as told in the NY Times article, many nursing homes add complex layers of corporate structure to insulate the money makers from being held accountable of wrongdoing.  Because of this many victims have no way of getting redress from courts when they are injured.

Kudos to Representatives David E. Miller, Greg Harris and Mary E. Flowers for sponsoring this important legislation. 

 

Press Coverage of Caps

Last year an Illinois judge declared noneconomic damage caps unconstitutional in LeBron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital (we blogged on it). Now the Illinois high court is getting ready to hear Gottlieb’s appeal, so we again get to hear the same old “tort reform” arguments. The other day we came across this story from a supposedly “unbiased” source, Medill Reports (part of Northwestern University).

This article reads like a press release from a “tort reform” group. It doesn’t mention any consumer advocates or victims, but instead heavily quotes groups like the Illinois Hospital Association (IHA) and the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA). It really gives a one-sided version of the issue. What’s so upsetting to me is that this article is indicative of much of the press coverage on the subject. It tows the line of big medicine and insurance and ignores who caps really hurt – the people. In a journalistic story about caps on damages, I think it would be important to offer the perspective of someone whose way of life has been forever changed by a preventable error. That’s what “tort reformers” hide and much of the media ignores when they talk about this issue.

What’s Hot! Hot! Hot! in Michigan?

Cross post from The Pop Tort by Amanda

No, it's not the weather – which was a whole 14° F in Lansing as I was writing this. 

The Governor talked about it in her State of the State address, state legislators are talking about it, it’s in the newspapers and on TV – even the U.S. Supreme Court has been talking about it.

And what is it? 

Drugs, and not just any drugs – FDA approved drugs.  Why?

Michigan has an unprecedented law that prevents residents harmed by dangerous drugs from gaining access to the civil justice system, which has been devastating for Michiganders while failing to accomplish any promised economic benefits for the state concludes a new report, A Tragic Blunder:  Michigan’s Drug Industry Immunity Law, released today by the Center for Justice & Democracy.

According to the report, since the law went into effect in 1996, numerous unsafe drugs have been marketed with approval by the Food and Drug Administration that have killed or injured Michigan residents.  Unlike victims in any other state in the country, Michigan residents are barred from seeking compensation for these deaths or injuries.  Meanwhile, contrary to what the law’s proponents promised, thousands of good paying jobs in the pharmaceutical industry have left the state.

There is real support for this repeal.  The House of Representatives passed repeal legislation last year, but the bill has been stalled in the Senate.  A petition to get the Senate talking about it began circulating on Tuesday.

So, perhaps the Senate ought to take a look at the CJ&D report, in case they are only hearing what the drug lobbyists are telling them?

Closure for rape victim

Late last year Chicago police sergeant John Herman was convicted of sexual assault and sentenced to 25 years in prison for raping a woman while on-duty back in 2004. Now the victim of his crime has some reparation. The woman received over $1 million in a settlement with the City of Chicago.

Having to relive something like this must have been incredibly difficult for the woman but at least now she has some sense of closure. We should also applaud her for doing us all a service. Settlements like this can lead to reforms that make everyone safer. Her lawyer commented on why he thinks this ruling is important to all Chicagoans.

"We hope this is a wake-up call for the ... Police Department that they will do whatever it takes to ensure what happened to our client ... will never happen again."

Let’s hope he is right.

False Advertising

Cross posted from The Pop Tort by John Guyette.

So what’s wrong with spending $258 million on advertising – if it brings in $12.7 billion in sales?  Sounds like a good investment right? 

Ok, ok, so what if after two years of this advertising campaign you pull the ads because they are frequently criticized for being inaccurate and misleading.  Check out today’s article in the New York Times but what I want to know is where is the FDA in all of this? I mean if we're thinking about giving up our right to take drug companies to court and relinquish all health and safety oversight to the FDA (thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court) shouldn’t they care that millions of advertising dollars gives an accurate portrayal of a drug?

Sadly, the answer is no.  Almost a decade ago the FDA relaxed its rules on drug advertising so there is less accountability for pharmaceutical companies in honest and accurate promotion of their drugs.

Exxon oil: slick for too long

Can you believe the ’89 Exxon-Valdez oil spill is still making headlines after almost two decades?

In 1994 thousands of Alaskan residents whose lives were rattled by the disaster won a battle against Exxon. They never got the compensation they were awarded though, as Exxon still hasn’t ponied up the damages they were ordered to pay as punishment. When Exxon’s appeal finally hits the Supreme Court tomorrow, Justices will decide whether their punishment was excessive. What is excessive to me is that they’ve spent the better part of my life avoiding responsibility for the accident. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune quoted a fisherman who summed up the sense of anxiety.

"I really wonder, what do you do if you don't get a just decision out of the Supreme Court," he said on his boat Prince William. "I mean, there's no other court to take it to. What do you got left, really? Anarchy?"

Between this and the "hot fuel" issue (see our last post) this has been a big couple of weeks for Exxon. Our officials in the civil justice system have some chances to really hold Big Oil accountable. Let’s hope this tragedy is settled once and for all.

"Hot Fuel:" The Big Oil Scam

If you don't know what "hot fuel" is and why it is costing consumers billions of dollars then read on and watch this short video.

I must admit that it is the first time that I am hearing about this problem and am outraged that oil companies can bilk billions from American consumers. 

The controversy centers around the oil industry's "century-old practice of pricing gasoline on a standard of 60 degrees." Consumers in states where the average temperature is above the standard say that this practice is bilking them out of a lot of money, because "[a]s temperatures rise during warmer months, the gasoline expands, meaning customers get less energy per gallon."  In Canada, where the oil companies were losing money because the average temperature is less than 60 degrees, they passed laws allowing for prices at the pump to reflect changes in temperature.  here in the U.S., Congress has estimated this practice to cost consumers $1.5 billion annually (others have a much higher number than this), but have not taken action to protect gas purchasers.

Another slap in the face to consumers is, when companies sell gas to each other and other large industries, like the airlines, they account for changes in temperature. So why can't consumers have the same benefit? 

The Kansas City Star has been writing about this issue since 2006 and the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights (FTCR), and their Oil Watchdog project, have also been spreading the word.  It is slowly gaining national attention, but what is driving the attention now is a class action suit made up of consumers from 26 states, Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico.  Most recently, a federal judge in Missouri has allowed the case to move forward on all counts. (Click here to read the judge's opinion.) The case will move into the discovery phase, or better known as the "who, what, when, where" chapter.  Independent truckers are pleased by the judges ruling because they know so well the cost of this scam to their bottom line.  They have said,

America's truckers are closely watching the progress of this case. They want, and deserve to get the same miles per gallon from every fill-up. Especially since they are having to buy an extra 200 gallons, or so, every year due to hot fuel...

While the defendants say they are in full compliance with the law, ExxonMobile have been putting stickers on its pumps in California and Arizona about fuel energy being "affected by temperature" as a tactic to try and fend off the class action lawsuits against "hot fuel" sales.

The plaintiffs are looking forward to see how the defendants, who have known about this issue since the 1920s, but have managed to keep it under wraps until now, handle explaining this to the court and public.

Since Congress is not acting, I am glad that we still have the civil justice system to turn to in order to fight this powerful and wealthy industry.

In Love: U.S. Supreme Court and the Drug Industry

Cross posted from The Pop Tort by Amanda

The other day I was having lunch with a friend who was lamenting that he needed an idea for his next screenplay.  This friend usually writes romantic comedies, so I thought, I’ve got a great idea for his next film.  It’s called, “The U.S. Supreme Court Is In Love With the Pharmaceutical Industry.”

Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision, allowing the makers of certain unsafe medical devices to get away with implanting them in people without legal accountability, was clearly Valentine gift (a few days belated) to drug companies - and there’s more to come!

And what's not to love?  It's an obscenely wealthy industry that has all the Viagra and Cialis it wants.

But like my last relationship, they make a badly matched couple.  And like a good friend sitting you down and saying, "what were you thinking?" it is going to take an intervention by the U.S. Congress to break up this love affair.

That's right, Congress can (and hopefully will) step in using that old system of checks and balances we learned about in civics class, and end this terribly destructive relationship.  Luckily, key members of Congress seem ready to step in, according to the New York Times Senator Edward M Kennedy (D-Mass) said,

"In enacting legislation on medical devices, Congress never intended that F.D.A. approval would give blanket immunity to manufacturers from liability for injuries caused by faulty devices ...Congress obviously needs to correct the court's decision."

And Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) said,

"The Supreme Court's decision strips consumers of the rights they've had for decades... This isn't what Congress intended, and we'll pass legislation as quickly as possible to fix this nonsensical situation."

So, I don't know if this story will be next summer's box office blockbuster, but regardless, it’s a relationship that Congress needs to do something about – before people get hurt!

How bad are our hospitals?

As you may have remembered a little while ago we blogged about the failure of the Illinois Hospital Report Card.  The law was supposed to give consumers an easy to use system to get information about how safe and well run Illinois' hospitals are, a great idea that fell far short of its potential.

Well Forbes Magazine has just published an investigative report into the safety of America's hospitals.  One of the most disturbing passages states that:

One in 200 patients who spends a night or more in a hospital will die from medical error. One in 16 will pick up an infection. Deaths from preventable hospital infections each year exceed 100,000, more than those from AIDS, breast cancer and auto accidents combined. (emphasis added)

WOW! I must say that these statistics are mind boggling, especially when some claim that we have the best healthcare system in the world.  Let me forewarn you, this report does not paint a pretty picture of some U.S. hospitals.

Hopefully, Springfield can get their act together and get the Report Card up and running, so Illinoisans can make better decisions when choosing their hospitals.  (If indeed patients actually have a choice of where they end up.)

Knowledge equals power.   

Update on East Peoria nursing home

The Peoria Gardens saga is finally coming to an end. You might remember us writing about the troubled nursing home before (click here and here). The latest out of Peoria is that the home will finally close on May 19th. Between now and then residents are finding new places to stay.

Hopefully Peoria Gardens residents will be safer wherever else they end up.  And maybe this news will send a message to other for profit homes that don’t give our seniors a decent quality of care. That would be great.  Still, this isn't going to provide the injured victims of their negligence with any kind of compensation.  THAT is why we need a civil justice system that will hold these corporations fully liable for wrongdoing.